Imagine your friend that does not know anything about linux, don’t you think this would make them not install the firefox flatpak and potentially think that linux is unsafe?

I ask this because I believe we must be careful and make small changes to welcome new users in the future, we have to make them as much comfortable as possible when experimenting with a new O.S

I believe this warning could have a less alarming design, saying something like “This app can use elevated permissions. What does this mean?” with the “What does this mean?” text as a clickable URL that shows the user that this may cause security risks. I mean, is kind of a contradiction to have “verified” on the app and a red warning saying “Potentially unsafe”, the user will think “well, should I trust this or not??”

      • refalo ( refalo@programming.dev ) 
        4·
        2 years ago

        Windows has implemented quite a few tricks to make this very difficult without setting off antivirus engines

        That’s funny because we have been shipping a commercial Windows app since XP that is keylogger-based using SetWindowsHookEx, and it has only tripped users’ antivirus maybe 1 or 2 times in 20 years.

        I wonder if there’s a desktop distro out there that enforces sandboxed applications by default.

        EasyOS is the first distro I’ve seen that at least runs every app as its own user by default, similar to Android.